Hi Rog:
> ROG:
> Not at all. I am familiar with variation and selection and that evolution
> can indeed lead to species that are well adapted to their environment. But
> this isn't teleological. Adding a purpose or goal doesn't add anything to
> the theory. Does it? What?
For starters, adding purpose helps solve some metaphysical puzzles,
like this from Chap. 7:
"The problems of free will versus determinism, of the relation of mind to
matter, of the discontinuity of matter at the subatomic level, of the
apparent purposelessness of the universe and the life within it are all
monster platypi created by the subject-object metaphysics."
And this from Chap. 17:
"But it's as foolish to think of a city or a society as created by human
bodies as it is to think of human bodies as a creation of the cells, or to
think of cells as created by protein and DNA molecules, or to think of
DNA as created by carbon and other inorganic atoms. If you follow that
fallacy long enough you come out with the conclusion that individual
electrons contain the intelligence needed to build New York City all by
themselves. Absurd."
For me, a few platypi and an absurdity or two is enough to raise
questions about the Darwinian explanation of how we got to where we
find ourselves today.
Incidentally, I feel obliged to comment on the article you referred us to in
SA which I hope to do later in some detail. But for now let me simply
say I found it full of, to borrow some words from someone I greatly
respect, "half truths, distortions, unsupported leaps of logic" and yes, a
touch of "mysticism." (-:
Platt
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:29 BST